Thursday Wasted

No, really, why did I give my Thursday night to watch that?

It didn't start out bad, really. The predictably terrible officiating -- the first penalty to Ottawa for tripping really should have been accompanied by one to Atlanta for diving -- and the predictable error leading to the opening Atlanta goal, those I can live with. That's part of being a Senators fan. But Ottawa spent a good deal of time in the offensive zone applying good pressure and getting good chances. "Keep trying boys," I told the TV, "they'll come."

But then the officials really got going. Three of the first seven penalties assigned to Ottawa were either iffy or flat out not penalties. At one point, we were five-to-one behind in terms of power plays. That's not clean play, that's poor officiating. And Sutton's two minutes for "elbowing" on a perfectly clean and legal check -- not to the head, not from behind, not away from the play -- THAT was PURE GARBAGE. Even someone like ME, who isn't keen on all the hitting and such that goes on, can see THAT.

Let's be fair. Neil's goal in the second should have been called back due to Kelly's presence in the crease. But with this kind of officiating, who the hell knows what you are going to get.

Through the end of two the Senators played well, getting most of the shots and the vast majority of the quality chances. And then the third started. The Senators just crumbled and gave up stupid goals due to poor coverage or running around in their own end. Again. Leaving Elliot hanging out there on his own, going the wrong way on the play because nobody's covering the guy sliding through the slot. Again.

Spezza getting that break. And. Not. Burying. It. Again. Dammit.

I don't blame Elliot for this. You can't, really. But for a(n allegedly) playoff-bound team, we shouldn't be talking about these kinds of miscues and collapses and all around bad hockey with the frequency that we are.

Saturday is an afternoon game, but fortunately for me I have something else scheduled so will be unable to watch it.

This isn't fun any more. I want my evening back.

The "Hot Goalie" Excuse

So yeah, I went away for a week. Sun, sand, private pool, and the single biggest cockroach I've ever seen (who cooperatively went away for the rest of the week after he'd been tipped).

But before I went away, there was this game against the Atlanta Thrashers. Maybe you remember? If not, let me refresh your memory:

October 31 2009, Atlanta at Ottawa: 3-1 (Final). Shots on goal: 21-51 -- not including those blocked or redirected enroute to the net. In other words, Atlanta goalie Ondrej Pavelec made 50 saves, permitting only a single Mike Fisher offering into the net.

And lo, did the commentators say: The Senators were stymied by a hot goalie.

This is what, the third time that this particular excuse has been trotted out? I remember the first game of the year in New York, when Henrick Lundqvist was granted the dubious honor of being dubbed the first "hot goalie" that the Senators ran into this year.

The thing is, it is just an excuse. It only works if the lack of scoring is unusual. If the Senators of early 2007 (who could seemingly put the puck in the net at will) had been stymied by a goalie, then yes, THAT would be a hot goalie.

But if you just can't score, and that state of being is a regular situation, then you can't just hand wave the whole thing off as running into a "hot goalie". The whole point of the game is to put the puck in the net. If you can't do it, then you have a problem.

And the Senators can't do it regularly, which means they have a problem.